Saroj Ram v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22415 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-415 Year-2020 Thana- AHIYAPUR District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== 1.

SAROJ RAM S/o Ram Nath Ram Resident of Village- Shivrahan Majhauliya, P.S.- Ahiyapur, Distt- Muzaffarpur. 2.

Geeta Devi W/o Ram Nath Ram Resident of Village- Shivrahan Majhauliya, P.S.- Ahiyapur, Distt- Muzaffarpur.

3.

Ram Nath Ram S/o Late Dasai Ram Resident of Village- Shivrahan Majhauliya, P.S.- Ahiyapur, Distt- Muzaffarpur. 4.

Amod Ram S/o Ram Nath Ram Resident of Village- Shivrahan Majhauliya, P.S.- Ahiyapur, Distt- Muzaffarpur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Chandra Shekhar Anand For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms.Suman Kumari Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER 12-01-2021 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

This application for grant of anticipatory bail arises out of Ahiyapur P.S. Case No. 415 of 2020, disclosing offences punishable under Sections 304B,201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The petitioner No.1 is the husband of the deceased, whereas petitioner No.2 is the mother-in-law, petitioner No.3 is father-in-law. Petitioner No.4 is brother of petitioner No.1. The deceased was married with petitioner No.1 on 04.06.2019. There is allegation in the First Information Report

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22415 of 2020(8) dt.12-01-2021 2/3 that petitioner No.1 and his family members used to demand dowry and subsequently all of them killed the deceased. It is alleged that the informant, who is mother of the victim, was not informed by her in-laws about the death of the deceased. The dead body was cremated in hurry so as to cause disappearance of the evidence.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners has argued that there is no specific allegation against the accused persons of demand of dowry. He has further submitted that as a matter of fact the deceased committed suicide because of her association with another person.

The explanation of petitioner No.1 in respect of the death of the deceased as mentioned in the application, seeking anticipatory bail cannot be accepted, for the purpose of grant of anticipatory bail. This application in respect of petitioner No.1 has therefore, no merit.

By an order dated 02.11.2020, petitioners were granted provisional bail.

So far as petitioner Nos. 2,3, and 4 are concerned, their provisional bail granted by order dated 02.11.2020 stands confirmed.

However, considering the facts and circumstances and

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22415 of 2020(8) dt.12-01-2021 3/3 the fact that petitioner No.1 is the husband of the deceased, his application for grant of anticipatory bail is dismissed. The petitioner No.1 is directed to surrender before the Court within six weeks from today and seek regular bail, if so advised. If he does so, his application for grant of regular bail shall be considered on its own merit without being prejudiced by rejection of the present anticipatory bail application by this Court.

(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) arun/- U